My Case for eternal Hell

[Ambassador791]

You're right about the interpretation based on plain reading but Jesus usually did'nt speak plainly in fact his disciples wondered when he would speak plainly. BTW if you want to stick to plain reading then be consistent and accept the verses in Rev 22.17 as offering salvation to those in the lake of fire, because that is the plain reading of it without any pre-suppositions.

I have been consistent with this passage and Rev 22.You must not have read what I wrote about this verse, if you had, you would have seen that this verse says nothing to your advantage here. You claim that I need to apply my method of interpretation to this verse as I do in other passages. The problem in not my interpretation, it is that you have taken the verse out of context and I have already proven that:

You have been saying that these verses are talking about what is happening in the new heavens and the new earth and that this is an invitation for those in hell to share in the water of life, because the bride is present, so who else could this invite for.

(If YOU are consistent, you must answer yes to the next questions)

In the new heavens and earth, is the angle of the Lord testifying to the churches like verse 16 says? Will there be the chance for people to take from the words of this book there too, as we read in verse 18? No!

Yes, towards the end of this book Jesus talks about the new heavens and earth. But here he has finished giving the vision. Now he gives closing comments. That’s why he says "16 I Jesus have sent my angel to testify unto you THESE THINGS in the churches¨What things? The things in the vision. He is talking about the spreading of this message given through the vision. These verses are not talking about the new heavens and earth anymore. They are not talking about the end or even part of the vision Jesus gave to John. This is what he (Jesus through the spirit) and the bride (the church) are going to do with the vision, that’s what verse 17 tells us:

17And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

The bride, (church) after receiving the message from the angle will invite all that thirst to know Jesus (the water of life).

Jesus did this on earth. He invited us to drink the living water.

Properly seen in its context, we can see that this is about evangelization on earth, not in hell.

You're right about the interpretation based on plain reading but Jesus usually did'nt speak plainly in fact his disciples wondered when he would speak plainly.

I know that Jesus spoke figuratively, I would not deny that. This does not mean that we cannot understand him at all. This does not excuse some extreme relativism to justify directly contradicting him. When he talks about the narrow path he is not speaking that figuratively. Many people understood Jesus’ words even when he spoke even more figuratively, and we see examples in the scripture (I can give you some later if you wish). In the verse I have offered, Jesus talks about a path… and life. Tell me, what is complicated about this? I guarantee that you will find very few Christians that have been confused over the years as to what “life” means here, and path more than likely refers to how we live, after all Jesus spoke mostly about that: how we ought to live. One thing is for sure, if your interpretation directly contradicts his words, you should be assured that you need to reexamine the text.

I think this narrow gate applies to reconciliation in this life plainly speaking and without entering it you are subject to judgment for your sins.

Yes, they are judged guilty of their sins outside of Christ…this is the second death. Those who have not had their sin atoned for must pay for their sins. We don’t disagree here. You seem to miss the part that follows and it has to do with whether or not you have the life that few find.If you are judged outside of Christ, you have not found life. The problem is that Jesus says after the judgment: “I tell you the truth, he will pay every last penny”. No forgiveness of sins by the savior equals…not saved by Jesus.

However again it boils down to what is God's purpose with us? Your view is that the overwhelming majority are in hell

You seem to keep trying to make my view sound bad by pointing out that Jesus tortures sinners forever.

Try to take note of what my view is:

Man rejects God, so God gives him what he wants…godlessness, and that is what hell is. Man tortures himself as he rejects all things good: God himself. So, God gives him what he wants: an existence void of all things good. That is what I believe to be torture. It is called outer darkness, so I really don’t think that it is fire at all.


In all possible realities, without rebirth, man cannot truly love or want God. God could tower over man and scare him into a superficial “repentance” (the owner will not open the door for them, don’t forget that). This “repentance” would disappear the moment that man would perceive that God is not watching.

However again it boils down to what is God's purpose with us? Your view is that the overwhelming majority are in hell

You see, your view ignores the purpose of life: what will man do when he thinks he can get away with whatever he wants, while God does not appear to be towering over him? This life is a test. If God just wanted us all in heaven, not matter what…why put us on earth at all. I believe that any created being with free will (angel or man) is able to rebel. So God sovernly chooses the conditions under which we might rebel and then be reconciled. Why put us through this test that in the end has God SEPARATING man into two groups if he really just wanted man together. Yes he wants man with him…but under certain conditions. Those conditions are met during this life. If man meets not those conditions, he gives man what he wants, he shuts him out from goodness.

As far as my philosophy about God's charactor , it's based on Jesus charactor which is compassionate,merciful and loving and forgiving and harsh to the religious leaders

He was harsh to more than just religious leaders.

You say that your view of God is based on Jesus’ character, well so is mine. Don’t forget that when Jesus is judging in revelation…he is hard core. God wiped out entire cities and peoples in the bible (the flood and Ananias and Sapphira). Don’t forget that it was Jesus doing all that. He was justified in doing those things, and I know that because he testifies that these people groups had “only evil thoughts all the time”...dare I say that our generation is no better?

[steve7150]

steve7150 wrote:
However again it boils down to what is God's purpose with us? Your view is that the overwhelming majority are in hell

You see, your view ignores the purpose of life: what will man do when he thinks he can get away with whatever he wants, while God does not appear to be towering over him? This life is a test. If God just wanted us all in heaven, not matter what…why put us on earth at all. I believe that any created being with free will (angel or man) is able to rebel. So God sovernly chooses the conditions under which we might rebel and then be reconciled. Why put us through this test that in the end has God SEPARATING man into two groups if he really just wanted man together. Yes he wants man with him…but under certain conditions. Those conditions are met during this life. If man meets not those conditions, he gives man what he wants, he shuts him out from goodness.




I see a different purpose for us then God just testing us as if he does'nt already know who will and who won't reject him. I think he wants us to develop charactor through learning compassion, mercy,love,anger,empathy and experiencing evil. Yes i think God uses evil as a teaching tool because in this universe we all learn by contrasts. Contrast is the best teaching tool by observing it and experiencing it. So if God just wanted more servants in heaven we could be made like angels but he wants sons. Again i say that i see nothing in scripture that makes physical death the deadline for mankind learning these lessons. I acknowledge at the resurrection we will be judged but within the judgment process i believe is the possibility of restoration for unbelievers and they may have to pay their sin debt but it still would not make them righteous. They would have to make Christ their Lord after they pay their debt and it may take dramatically differing punishments for different levels of sins but that's what justice is, making the punishment fit the crime.
Having a one size fits all is not justice, Hitler is not getting the same punishment as a 17 year old girl who died in the Haitian earthquake who never heard of Christ.

[steve7150]

steve7150 wrote:
However again it boils down to what is God's purpose with us? Your view is that the overwhelming majority are in hell

You seem to keep trying to make my view sound bad by pointing out that Jesus tortures sinners forever.

Try to take note of what my view is:

Man rejects God, so God gives him what he wants…godlessness, and that is what hell is. Man tortures himself as he rejects all things good: God himself. So, God gives him what he wants: an existence void of all things good. That is what I believe to be torture. It is called outer darkness, so I really don’t think that it is fire at all.




Bro i'm not trying to make your view bad, it does'nt need my trying, it is what it is. I know a lot of unbelievers and most of them don't seem like the way you describe unbelievers. They seem like you and me except for the fact we have better judgment in one particular area.

[steve7150]

steve7150 wrote:
As far as my philosophy about God's charactor , it's based on Jesus charactor which is compassionate,merciful and loving and forgiving and harsh to the religious leaders

He was harsh to more than just religious leaders.

You say that your view of God is based on Jesus’ character, well so is mine. Don’t forget that when Jesus is judging in revelation…he is hard core. God wiped out entire cities and peoples in the bible (the flood and Ananias and Sapphira). Don’t forget that it was Jesus doing all that. He was justified in doing those things, and I know that because he testifies that these people groups had “only evil thoughts all the time”...dare I say that our generation is no better?



I think in the New Covenant, God changes the relationship with his creation including unbelievers as can be seen with the way Jesus interacted with sinners. He showed compassion "neither do i condemn you" , this adulteress was no better then anyone else yet he simply forgave her as he did his murderers when he was on the cross.
At the second coming it's judgment time and he will be harsh to those who deserve it and i think he will be compassionate to those who merit it even if they are unbelievers.
He is bigger then hell and all things are possible with God, all things.

[Ambassador791]

I think in the New Covenant, God changes the relationship with his creation including unbelievers as can be seen with the way Jesus interacted with sinners. He showed compassion "neither do i condemn you" , this adulteress was no better than anyone else yet he simply forgave her as he did his murderers when he was on the cross. At the second coming it's judgment time and he will be harsh to those who deserve it and i think he will be compassionate to those who merit it even if they are unbelievers.

He showed compassion "neither do i condemn you

So...you point out that God is different now, he will be compassionate because this is a new covenant and that this is how he will judge? HE WILL NOT CONDEMN? According to your view, God will only act the way Jesus did. Jesus also said that he did not come to Judge, so God won’t judge anyone?

You have backed your self into a corner here. If you admit that God will judge, then you must admit that God´s character played out in judement will NOT look like the way Jesus acted while on earth, because jesus condemed no one at all!

You may say, “no, God will judge but it will be “character developmental”. But then you must say that no one will be shut out into outer darkness, no one will be pushed off to the side for ANY period of time, no one will be rejected because Jesus did not reject the prostitute. Jesus realized no punishment at all on any sinner (developmental or not), so in your view, why assume that he would punish anyone at all? While he was on earth, did Jesus ever lock anyone into a dark dungeon to make him pay for his sins... all of his sins (to develop character, or not) ? Jesus only forgave sins while on earth.He never demanded payment, so everyone will be forgiven on the Day of Judgment, not one condemned...Just like Jesus judged?

I think in the New Covenant, God changes the relationship with his creation including unbelievers as can be seen with the way Jesus interacted with sinners.

Jesus said that he did not come to judge more than once in the New testament, so how can you look at Jesus and say that this is how he will judge...if when he acted that way he himself said that he was... not judging?!?!?!?
You cannot have tunnel vision when trying to understand the character of God. God does not change, we are in an age of grace, he has promised to lower the boom some day.

I see a different purpose for us then God just testing us as if he does'nt already know who will and who won't reject him. I think he wants us to develop charactor through learning compassion, mercy,love,anger,empathy and experiencing evil. Yes i think God uses evil as a teaching tool because in this universe we all learn by contrasts. Contrast is the best teaching tool by observing it and experiencing it. So if God just wanted more servants in heaven we could be made like angels but he wants sons.

Yes God wants sons and yes God knows the outcome... but that does not mean that this life is not a test to determine mans ultimate destiny, and I do mean ultimate. God wants those that want to be with him. The PEOPLE that ACTUALLY DO want God and actually DO NOT want God, CANNOT exist until they are put into an environment where they may choose a side. I agree that this life is a way for us to build character, but if that is all that it is, why such harsh words for the unbeliever? Why the separation of sheep and goats? Why the distinction between the children of God and the children of the devil? Why is your “extended character development” (hell) also called the second death? Why is it a place that results from Jesus’ rejection to the sinner (Jesus: “if you reject me, I will reject you”). You say that it is not really rejection, but developmental. The truth is that the real meaning of the word “rejection” (the meaning that you must reject) fits the other scriptures on the subject: “shut out into outer darkness, not granted entry” sent to a place called “the second death”. Having seen the description and the type of language used to describe the destination of the unbeliever, the most sensible thing to conclude is that when Jesus says that he will reject...he will do just that.

Not to mention the fact that this “character development” through punishment is said to be for the sons of God in the book of Hebrews. It would be nice to believe that everyone is just part of this one big happy family, but John makes a distinction between the sons of God and the sons of Satan. Jesus makes the same distinction in the gospels when talking to the Pharisees. No one that is cared for by a father is ever rejected by that father (as Jesus says that they will be). This division that God makes by saying that some are his children and some are not does not leave room to believe that we are all God’s children here on earth just being corrected in different ways. Jesus draws a line and says “I do not know you”.

Having a one size fits all is not justice, Hitler is not getting the same punishment as a 17 year old girl who died in the Haitian earthquake who never heard of Christ.

I never said that there was a one size fits all punishment?!?! If you look at my past posts you will see that I recognize that some will get fewer blows than others, what that exactly means...I don’t know.
Here is another quote of yours on what I believe:

you believe Christ torments unbelievers forever

Bro i'm not trying to make your view bad, it does'nt need my trying, it is what it is.

...no, you have added enough to my view on your own, and spoken on my behalf (despite what I have written on the subject on this thread) by saying that I believe in a hell where people receive a “one size fits all punishment” and “tortured by Christ” himself. I HAVE SAID that Jesus is present when the sinner is rejected to the second death and that hell is the granting of godlessness to those who do not want God. This means nothing good will be there and that would be torture enough.
Now, if I said that God withdraws goodness from the sinner, would you say that is the same as saying that Jesus himself is directly torturing him? One sounds reasonable (people don’t want God... that’s what they get) one does not. I never said that Jesus tortures anyone. He locks them into outer darkness, Jesus on one side of the door, the sinner on the other, away from God...what the sinner ultimately wanted.

What I have presented is reasonable. It is not the tossing of all sinners into the same scorching flames not matter what they have done. Let’s face it, It makes it easier for you to argue your view if you misrepresent mine to make it sound unreasonable.

....unbelievers and they may have to pay their sin debt but it still would not make them righteous. They would have to make Christ their Lord after they pay their debt...”

You say that the paying of the sin debt would not make them righteous. I don’t believe that is biblical. As far as I know, our sin debt is the thing that separates us from God and makes us unrighteous. Payment of sins was given so that we could be reconciled. If we can pay for our sins and we just have to make Jesus Lord to go to heaven, then there was another way for God and man to be reconciled apart from the sacrifice for sins. Jesus’ sacrifice was not 100% needed in you view.

Peter said that Jesus was not to wash his feet. Jesus said that if he did not wash him, Peter could have nothing to do with him. He was not only talking about the washing of feet. Jesus was talking about the cleansing of sin, and the one that Jesus does not cleanse can have NOTHING to do with him.
Any Christian would say that you must not receive Jesus with mere words to be saved, and that it is much more than the confession “ Jesus is Lord” that will get you to heaven. Mere words do not save on earth, but a life truly lived in Him through faith. Now, you want to say that we can bypass the cross, give Jesus lip service with a bumper sticker catch phrase “Jesus is King” and it’s all the same. Don’t bet your life on it, or anyone else’s life. It ignores the value that God seeks in a life lived out in Him.

I see a different purpose for us then God just testing us as if he does'nt already know who will and who won't reject him.

You said this in response to my point “if everyone goes to heaven in the end, why the test of life”
His knowledge of the outcome has nothing to do with this. God can’t simply place the ones that want him and the ones that do not into distinct categories before they have lived...because cannot exist until they might have had the chance to choose a side, until they might have done otherwise.
God has set up the perfect environment to REALIZE the type of people he wants with himself in eternity, the people that might live a life in him when they MIGHT HAVE done otherwise. GOD WANTS THOSE THAT WANT HIM, the course of this life realizes, actualizes and creates the people that God wants, people that cannot exist until they have run the course of LIFE. If God towers over them after this life is all over to make them choose to be with him, by nature they would not be: beings that choose him when they MIGHT HAVE done otherwise. These are the people that God does NOT want. If they just all go to heaven...why even create the environment that determines all of this?
If all Jesus came to do was get us out of deserved and needed character development, that is no salvation. In such case, the type of death he suffered was unnecessary because: why save us from a father that is just really trying to help us in the end anyway.
The fact that Jesus went to the cross after pleading for another way for us to be reconciled is a testimony that screams: you are not safe, with out this act you are with our hope, you are in danger, so much danger that I will go through all of this to save you…from something SO BAD that it is called the second death…not detention.

I know a lot of unbelievers and most of them don't seem like the way you describe unbelievers

All I have said is what the bible says: God has “determined the times and places for man, so that he may know God” (if he knows not God… it’s his fault, not God’s) and that “man recognises not his sin”, so it is no surprise that he (and you) see man as basically good.
You and these people that to not my characterisation of man, do not a problem with my description, but the bible´s.

...but that is what you have been show casing throughout this thread:

Jesus says that few find life...you say all find it

Jesus says that he must clean the sinner to be reconciled to himself...you say that we can clean our selves and then have Jesus later anyway

Paul says that without Jesus we are without hope in the world...you say that without him there is still hope

Jesus says that he will reject...you say he will not

Jesus and John say that not all are children of God...you say that they are

The writer of Hebrews says that punishment that develops us as children is for the children of God only...you say it is not

Jesus says that the punishment of the sinner will last as long as the punishment of the saint...you say it will not

...I could keep going

What do these scriptures have in common? They are all unambiguous...
...and they all...you contradict.

Give me one...ONE scripture I have contradicted to make my point?! Don’t mention the character of Jesus, because I have answered that, and don’t use Rev 22/ 18 until you can show that you are able to properly exegete it as I have clearly done for all to see.

No matter how well you think you know the character of God (and we have seen here that you do not know it as well as you think) it does not give you the right to directly contradict this many scriptures...to this magnitude.

It cannot be said of you that you rightly divide the word of truth when you run yourself up against the scripture on this scale...matter of fact, you are off the charts.

[steve7150]

What I have presented is reasonable. It is not the tossing of all sinners into the same scorching flames not matter what they have done. Let’s face it, It makes it easier for you to argue your view if you misrepresent mine to make it sound unreasonable.


steve7150 wrote:
....unbelievers and they may have to pay their sin debt but it still would not make them righteous. They would have to make Christ their Lord after they pay their debt...”
You say that the paying of the sin debt would not make them righteous. I don’t believe that is biblical. As far as I know, our sin debt is the thing that separates us from God and makes us unrighteous. Payment of sins was given so that we could be reconciled. If we can pay for our sins and we just have to make Jesus Lord to go to heaven, then there was another way for God and man to be reconciled apart from the sacrifice for sins. Jesus’ sacrifice was not 100% needed in you view.

Whether sinners are in outer darkness or flames or slime the overidding element of their punishment is that it is eternal and IMO that overidding element is what makes your view unjust and contrary to God's attribute of justice. You made a good point that the compassion Jesus showed may not translate into compassion on the day of judgment but it may because it is part of his charactor. I don't think his compassion was only because we are in an age of grace but because it is who he is, after all scripture says that Jesus Father "is love."
As far as sinners paying their sin debt goes, it exists at death and on judgment day which is why we are judged by our works. What are our negative works but our sin debt and by that sinners are judged. The fact it is a debt means it is owed to the creditor who is God therefore it needs to be paid. As i previously said i think the fact that it may or may not be able to be paid does'nt eliminate the separation from God that the sinner has because the sins are not forgotten or forgiven. One of the benefits of having Christ as Lord is that our sins are actually forgotten, the slate is wiped clean which only happens through Christ.
It is God's WILL that all mankind be saved 1 Tim 2.4
God's WILL will be done Matt 6.10 & Isa 46.10-11
Do you want God's will to be done Amb?

[steve7150]

Jesus says that few find life...you say all find it

Jesus says that he must clean the sinner to be reconciled to himself...you say that we can clean our selves and then have Jesus later anyway

Paul says that without Jesus we are without hope in the world...you say that without him there is still hope

Jesus says that he will reject...you say he will not

Jesus and John say that not all are children of God...you say that they are

The writer of Hebrews says that punishment that develops us as children is for the children of God only...you say it is not

Jesus says that the punishment of the sinner will last as long as the punishment of the saint...you say it will not

...I could keep going

What do these scriptures have in common? They are all unambiguous...
...and they all...you contradict.





These scriptures refer to this age. If there is no salvation after this age then you are right that few will find salvation but even if you could prove salvation was limited to this life , that still is a long way from eternal punishment. However i think Christ will save people after this age , maybe not all but many i think and you clearly believe he won't and sinners wil be eternally punished.
Therefore i think we have presented our cases and we each see our view as true and logical but i think the subject is exchausted at this point. So you can have the last post unless you compell me to answer, but i would rather not.

[Ambassador791]

Therefore i think we have presented our cases and we each see our view as true and logical but i think the subject is exchausted at this point. So you can have the last post unless you compell me to answer, but i would rather not.

I told myself this same thing about 4 pages ago when I presented my “my conclusion at this point” post. It is hard not to respond when you feel like you have a good response, in fact I bet you will not be able to resist responding to what I have written below...because it’s good stuff...I hope you can see that.
Just a few more pages and we might be able to publish one of those books by two authors writing opposing views on the same subject.

It is God's WILL that all mankind be saved 1 Tim 2.4
God's WILL will be done Matt 6.10 & Isa 46.10-11
Do you want God's will to be done Amb?

But I am sure that even you would admit that Gods perfect will is not always done. Yes, it is God’s perfect will that all be saved. But according to the bible, it has been God’s permissive will that has allowed all kinds horrible things to happen, things that he hates.

God created man to FOREVER exist, before the fall. Man fell, and then death came. If God allowed the results of sin to end the existence of any one man or woman, sin would have won, Satan’s will would be done (self destruction through pride)...because God created man to not die, but to live. Maybe that is why he resurrects all onto judgement: If he left one man dead, annihilated, Satan would have beat out Gods will for that man to exist. So, in my view, at least that man exists somewhere. The “where” might not be God’s perfect will for him, but it is his permissive will nonetheless and, it is man’s free will that got him there.

If God’s permissive will is that man would choose freely to be with him or not...then the outcome is his will as well.
You say that it is Gods will that all men are reconciled to himself. Yes, I agree, but that is qualified by his will that WE choose.

If man accepts God only when his back is against the wall in hell, when it is his only option left...that is not a free willed choice.
God’s will was for man to have a free choice. So, my good Steve, I ask you the same thing you asked me...do you want ALL of God’s will to be done?

Jesus says that few find life...you say all find it .Jesus says that he must clean the sinner to be reconciled to himself...you say that we can clean our selves and then have Jesus later anyway. Paul says that without Jesus we are without hope in the world...you say that without him there is still hope. Jesus says that he will reject...you say he will not. Jesus and John say that not all are children of God...you say that they are.The writer of Hebrews says that punishment that develops us as children is for the children of God only...you say it is not.Jesus says that the punishment of the sinner will last as long as the punishment of the saint...you say it will not...I could keep going.What do these scriptures have in common? They are all unambiguous...
...and they all...you contradict.

These scriptures refer to this age.

You make this qualification...the scripture does not. With this argument of yours you could explain away any doctrine. You will have to do better than that. Do you really think that this much of what the scripture says was only for the living world and had nothing to do with the one to come?

Lets look at a couple of these:

Jesus said to Peter that if He did not wash him, He could have nothing to do with him. You say that Jesus meant that: He could have nothing to do with Peter in this age if He did not clean Peter (with his sacrifice), but in the age to come He can (even if Peter has not been cleansed by Jesus’ sacrifice).

This falls right apart when you follow it to its logical conclusion:

Why would Jesus have nothing to do with the sinner (unclensed) in this age...but have no problem with having something to do with him in the next? Did Jesus have nothing to do with sinners (uncleaned by himself) while he was on earth?

Jesus said that he did not come to judge when he was on earth...so, follow the logic here: if there are two ages that we are looking at: #1, when Jesus was on earth and #2 when he is Judge in the next age. If during one of the two ages he will separate himself (have nothing to do with), PASS JUDGMENT on sinners on account of them not being cleansed by him...which age will he do it in? The age in which he testified to the fact that he was NOT judging...or the age in which he promises to judge.

So, anyone can see: Logically, Jesus had to be saying that if the sinner is not cleansed by his sacrifice, when the age in which he will judge arrives, he will reject and have nothing to do with such a person. This is undeniable: Jesus came to a lost, unclensed world and had everything to do with it. He was able to do that because he came...not as a judge, but a peace maker.
To say that this verse means that he had nothing to do with the unclensed while he was on earth is to turn the gospel message on its head: logically it can’t be done!

Paul says that before we knew Jesus, we were without hope. You say that means without hope in this life, but with hope in the next age. I say it means no hope at all.

If the hope Paul is talking about only talks about hope in this age...what is the object of the hope that the man does not have, what is the object of the hope that he should have...if it is not eternal life? A better life now? Is that what Paul says we were missing out on outside of Jesus?: the sinner is without hope of having a better life in this age? This would only make sense to the word of faith crowd that think that Jesus died to give us things on earth: riches, health and wealth. “Outside of Jesus, you are missing out on the blessings!”. But people become rich and healthy without ever knowing Jesus, so it cant Just be talking about temporal things and good living.

In this age the man without Jesus can hope in the fact that he is still friends with the world, but what is the answer to the persecuted Christian that sees no hope in the current world as it all comes crashing down around him? It is the fact that biblical hope is that which reaches far out beyond this age into the next. Biblical hope is that our reward is not now (in anything in this age) but in eternity with our saviour. I promise you that you have the meaning of biblical hope backwards...true hope that the bible talks about is the hope in the eternal life found in Jesus, nothing in this age.

If there is no salvation after this age then you are right that few will find salvation but even if you could prove salvation was limited to this life...

If the sinner pays for all of his sins...what is the use of salvation? You say that the sinner could still be reconciled even without salvation, after paying all of his sin ,without being cleansed by Jesus. But, now you must understand (don’t say that you don’t) that in judgment, IN THE NEXT AGE, Jesus will reject the one that rejects him and have NOTHING to do with the man that has not been cleansed by his sacrifice. Jesus saying that the sinner is left to pay for all of his sin after the judgment proves that there is no salvation after that point. Jesus paid for our sins to reconcile us…that IS salvation. If we pay for them all, he pays for none: NO SALVATION. This is not complicated.

[steve7150]

If the sinner pays for all of his sins...what is the use of salvation? You say that the sinner could still be reconciled even without salvation, after paying all of his sin ,without being cleansed by Jesus. But, now you must understand (don’t say that you don’t) that in judgment, IN THE NEXT AGE, Jesus will reject the one that rejects him and have NOTHING to do with the man that has not been cleansed by his sacrifice. Jesus saying that the sinner is left to pay for all of his sin after the judgment proves that there is no salvation after that point. Jesus paid for our sins to reconcile us…that IS salvation. If we pay for them all, he pays for none: NO SALVATION. This is not complicated.






Well actually scripture says he was the propitiation not only of the believers sins but the sins of the whole world. So perhaps the unbeliever has no sin debt at death therefore the purpose of the lake of fire must be either eternal punishment or restoration based on being judged by their works. You believe eternal punishment is just and i don't , you believe scripture teaches eternal punishment and i don't, you believe physical death is the biblical deadline for salvation and i don't, you believe evil will exist eternally and i don't.
We can rehash what has been discussed here dozens of times , like the definition of "aionios" or "fire" or Rev 22.17,
or what is the meaning and impact of the fact that the devil blinds the minds of unbelievers but we won't agree so i wish you well brother and nice talking with you.

[Ian]

Steve, though Ambassador is of course entitled to his position, I trust that he at least hopes you will be proven to have been right. If a Christian doesn`t hope for such, then I wonder whether there`s some hidden agenda at work in them.